Case Resources
Search this Case
in
Google Scholar
on the Web
Google
Web Search
MSN
Web Search
Yahoo!
Web Search
in the News
Google
News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google
Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google
Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Paul H. Parker, Appellant, v. United States of America, Appellee
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit. - 235 F.2d 21
Argued May 24, 1956 Decided June 7, 1956
Mr. Joseph M. Del Nero, Washington, D. C. (appointed by the District Court) for appellant.
Mr. Fred L. McIntyre, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., Lewis Carroll, Harold H. Titus, Jr., and E. Tillman Stirling, Asst. U. S. Attys., were on the brief, for appellee.
Before EDGERTON, Chief Judge, and BASTIAN and BURGER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
This appeal is from a conviction for a robbery committed May 9, 1955. The trial commenced November 21, 1955. Insanity was asserted as a defense.
Dr. Epstein of St. Elizabeths Hospital, who had examined and treated the defendant both before and after the crime, testified regarding his mental condition. The District of Columbia Code, 1951, § 14-308, 29 Stat. 138, forbids physicians to disclose confidential information acquired in attending a patient in a professional capacity. But an amendment, effective August 9, 1955, makes this prohibition inapplicable in criminal trials when the accused raises the defense of insanity. 69 Stat. 612. We think the District Court was right in applying this amendment. Cf. Hopt v. Utah, 110 U.S. 574, 587-590, 4 S.Ct. 202, 28 L.Ed. 262. We find no error affecting substantial rights.
Affirmed.